A few comments on the questions raised:
- the current PSML system has indeed a known limitation when you try to
centrally
manage changes to user profiles without impacting their customized
preferences.
I submitted a proposal on an updated PSML structure to fix this issue
about 1,5
year ago but we never came around to fix it as it implies extensive
changes and
may possibly break compatibility with current installations.
Additionally, David has added recently a "ref" attribute in the PSML
markup to
tackle this issue differently. Using this approach it should be possible
to
leverage the layout while still keeping the customized attributes per
user.
Unfortunately, as far as I know it's still a work in progress.
- about your requirements:
if I understand correctly your need, you want to give the users the
ability to customize
their portlets but not to chose them or modify their layout.
In Jetspeed terms, you want the user to be able to customize their
Portlets but not their
PortletSets.
To do this the easiest way is simply to remove or hide the ability to
customize them !
* copy the WEB-INF\templates\vm\controls\html\jetspeed-tab.vm to a new
file (like
jetspeed-tab-nocustomize.vm) and edit it to remove the customize links
* change the WEB-INF\conf\controls.xreg registry to use your modified
template instead of
the default one.
You have now hidden the feature, if you want to remove it completely :
* modify the Customize action
(org.apache.jetspeed.modules.actions.controls.Customize)
to change the last test from:
if (found!=null)
to
if ((found!=null)&&(!(found instanceof PortletSet)))
recompile and redeploy and you're set.
If you're really paranoid you can also remove the following action:
- org.apache.jetspeed.modules.actions.portlets.CustomizeSet
Remember that you're dealing with an open source system, if you don't
like the rules set by
the system, remove them ! We tried to make it easy for you to do so and
it's much simpler
than trying to add new rules or develp very generic ones.
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Matthew Forsyth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Envoyé : jeudi 29 août 2002 10:21
> À : Jetspeed Users List; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Objet : Re: Psml management
>
>
> Good questions... strictly out-of the box
> role-based-psml also wouldn't work for us for the same
> reason, some users have more than one role. I have
> some custom logic that only looks at the particular
> roles which are associated with a "layout type"... in
> the database these roles aren't differentiated from
> other roles in any way.
>
> The question of users getting to chose their own role
> doesn't apply to us; in fact users can't even directly
> sign themselves up to jetspeed. Their jetspeed
> account only gets created in response to an external
> process which knows which role they are supposed to
> be.
>
> -matt
>
>
> --- Stefan Kuhn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi Metthew,
> > I was thinking about giving psml to users depending
> > on the role as well, but
> > I came to the conclusion that this doesn't make
> > sense because: When people
> > subscribe (i. e. create a new account) they get one
> > specified role anyway. Or
> > do you leave to visitors to choose which role they
> > want to have ? But then,
> > when roles mean security restrictions, your securtiy
> > is gone, because people
> > can choose their role freely. So I thought it would
> > be better to have the
> > assignment of psmls if the administrator gives roles
> > to users.
> > One more problem: What to do if the user has got
> > multiple roles - which psml
> > take then ? Do you know what the built-in role-based
> > psml does in such a case
> > ?
> > Thanks for your answers and sorry for asking
> > questions instead of helping you.
> > Stefan
> >
> > Am Mittwoch, 28. August 2002 23:55 schrieben Sie:
> > > Here are my experiences with the jetspeed psml
> > > management system. I've had to change a couple
> > things
> > > in ways which somebody else might find useful
> > (please
> > > let me know if so!) Also, I am discovering that I
> > may
> > > have a (hopefully reconcilable) philosophical
> > problem
> > > with PSML.
> > >
> > > Before I begin, our portal (still in development
> > > stage) can be seen at
> > >
> > > http://nurse.ri.seawave.com:8180/portal/portal
> > >
> > > You can log in using "testcrew/password".
> > >
> > >
> > > We don't plan on letting our users customize their
> > > portal pages at all in terms of the layout,
> > presence
> > > or absence of certain portlets. However, we need
> > to
> > > give them ways to customize attributes of their
> > > existing portlets.
> > >
> > > We also need to service more than one TYPE of
> > user,
> > > each with a different pre-defined set of panes and
> > > portlets.
> > >
> > > Correct me if I'm wrong, but we can't use
> > role-based
> > > PSML because that would prevent the use of
> > individual
> > > settings.... any change to a portlet attribute
> > would
> > > then be seen by ALL other users in the same role.
> > >
> > > Also, there is no single user from whom psml files
> > for
> > > new users could be copied, because that wouldn't
> > allow
> > > for different layouts for different types of
> > users.
> > >
> > > So I changed JetspeedSecurity to point to my own
> > > UserManagement class, and overrode the
> > > addDefaultPSML() method to make a copy of the psml
> > > associated with the user's role rather than the
> > psml
> > > of another user (like turbine).
> > >
> > > Not a huge deal, but now I am arriving at what
> > seems
> > > to be a bigger problem:
> > > Although the psml file of a user will differ from
> > > those of his/her peers only in very narrowly
> > defined
> > > ways (only in the manipulation of attributes for
> > > portlets), each user still has a separate copy of
> > the
> > > file.
> > >
> > > This means that as we add new functionality to our
> > > portal, adding new portlets and presumably moving
> > the
> > > existing ones around somewhat, ONLY new users will
> > > benefit from these changes.
> > >
> > > Everytime we want to add a new portlet, we'll have
> > to
> > > write a script that will iterate through
> > everyone's
> > > psml and manipulate the xml in a certain way,
> > adding
> > > entries for the new portlet.... the exact type of
> > > thing that was supposed to be short-circuited by
> > the
> > > Customizer. Presumably this will have to be done
> > > when the server is shut down, because otherwise
> > the
> > > psml files of any currently-logged-in users will
> > be
> > > overwritten back to their old state when a they
> > log
> > > out.
> > >
> > > Aren't the notions of CONTENT and SETTINGS
> > separable?
> > > Shouldn't this information be stored in 2
> > separate
> > > files? Did I miss some way that the current psml
> > > system can allow for this? If not, how much work
> > > would have to be done to allow for this? I would
> > > certainly be willing to adopt such a project
> > rather
> > > than resorting to the "mass update script"
> > strategy
> > > mentioned above...
> > >
> > > -
> > > Matthew Forsyth
> > > Seawave.com
> > >
> > > __________________________________________________
> > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes
> > > http://finance.yahoo.com
> >
> > --
> > Stefan Kuhn M. A.
> > MPI of Chemical Ecology, Winzerlaer Str. 10,
> > Beutenberg Campus, 07745
> > Jena, Germany
> > Tel: +49(0)3641 571261 - Fax: +49(0)3641 571202
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> >
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes
> http://finance.yahoo.com
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
